Is God determined to allow no proof or evidence of his existence? Part II

Legend writes:Yes, but that was my conscience talking, not God.

Legend writes:also, on a couple of occasions I've decided to do something wrong and then went ahead and did it anyway! Was God asleep on these occasions?

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:He's revealing himself omni-presently -- and he's talking to everyone who ever existed, exists, or ever will exist -- right now at this moment as we speak.

NIV writes:By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead.

NIV writes:The heavens declare the glory of God;
the skies proclaim the work of his hands.Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they display knowledge.There is no speech or language
where their voice is not heard.Their voice goes out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world.

NIV writes:The law of the LORD is perfect,
reviving the soul.
The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy,
making wise the simple.The precepts of the LORD are right,
giving joy to the heart.
The commands of the LORD are radiant,
giving light to the eyes.

NIV writes:For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities -” his eternal power and divine nature ”- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

NIV writes:For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)

NIV writes:I desire to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart.

NIV writes:The lamp of the LORD searches the spirit of a man ; it searches out his inmost being.

NIV writes:O righteous God, who searches minds and hearts, bring to an end the violence of the wicked and make the righteous secure.

NIV writes:Praise the LORD, all you nations; extol him, all you peoples.

purpledawn writes:Now I understand. I disagree, but I understand.

Romans 10: 14-15 NIV writes: How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in?And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard?And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!" But not all the Israelites accepted the good news.For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our message?"Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ. But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did: Of course they did: "Their voice has gone out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world." Again I ask: Did Israel not understand?First, Moses says, And Isaiah boldly says, But concerning Israel he says,

NIV writes:The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities -” his eternal power and divine nature -” have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and beautiful purple candles.

requote writes: Requote from this thread...First of all, as I've said before, the Scriptures do indicate that all people know the word of God even if they do not acknowledge it (or know that Christ is the source).You quoted the following passage of Scripture as the proof text of your assertion: However, in quoting this text, you completely omitted what Paul says further on. Paul explains this in detail as follows: Let's review what is being said here.Paul says, "Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ."Then Paul asks, "Did they not hear?"To this Paul then asserts that they did hear the message through the word of Christ.And how does Paul say that they heard the message through the word of Christ?Paul quotes Psalm 19:4 as a proof text as follows, "Their voice has gone out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world."In other words, the word of Christ has gone out into all the earth, the words of Christ to the ends of the world -- so there is no excuse for not believing in God just as Paul said before in Romans 1:20 Going back to the entire text of Psalm 19:1-4 (which also follows this exact same reasoning) one can reasonably say that Paul has concluded that: I've already addressed this passage before and all you said was that I've misunderstood it, or interpretted it improperly, or was perhaps spiritually deluded, or maybe even suffering from demonic possession (as you've alluded before to others who do not agree with you).Furthermore, the Scriptures do indicate that those that do not know Christ "by name" nonetheless still believe in him by their actions: You've never actually addressed this passage except to say that these people who are considered righteous will "earn" a less hot place in hell.~ yay ~Faith, all that I'm saying is that Christ knows them -- and that this is more important than us knowing Christ. No. Salvation would be given to anyone that the Spirit revealed would have believed if the message had been properly given to them. Consequently, when we see people expressing remorse for doing something that God calls "sin" -- even though they apparently don't know God -- many are compelled to think that these kinds of people would have been open to the message of salvation if it had been fairly presented to them.In particular, I beleive that Christ, who is by the Scriptures own admission omnipotent in his glorified state, could examine the hearts and minds of any person to see how they "would have acted" if the situation were different.I personally do not beleive this to be a vague statement which bears no resemblance to the various Judeo-Christian schools of thought. For example, the Scriptures themselves seem to disply a very similar message as follows in Hebrews 4:12-14: The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. As such, it seems to me that God could easily observe the multitude of different possibilities that lay before each individual human being and make it as if were something that actually happened and we could be held accountable for.Or, as the Scriptures again say in Romans 4:17: In this sense, it seems to me that God is capable of determining the faith that one would have had "as though they were" placed in the right cicumstances.Consequently, when we look around the world, we do see glimpses of the gospel message everywhere -- even in nature whenever animals engage in traits of self-sacrifice in order to continue their own species. I know what you mean Faith -- and I don't agree with it. But I've never said that you're wrong though -- I simply pointed out contradictions in your thinking and suggested that "I think" you are wrong in regards to some of your conclusions. This is to say, I've always held that what you're suggesting is one possible meaning of it, one that might actuially be true.But you seem to be incapable of even thinking that you could even possibly be wrong -- and quite comfortable in comdemning others in the process of asserting your own views. That's not true. And I've already explained why this wasn't true. By my standards Christ is the Savior and our knowledge of him when lovingly moved by the Spirit is a guarantee to salvation.Others, however, know what the truth is but do not realize where the truth comes from. As they grope about in the darkness, they can easilly get discouraged by their inability to find the source of their truth. They can become led astray by seducing spirits because they have no sure word of the Scriptures to compare the truth of God's record. I've never denied that the Scriptures are the most sure word of God's revelation to man. Does this sound unfair to you?I tend to think that when a Christian is authentically called by God, they are called in such a way that their refusal to comply is damnable in the eyes of God.In other words, we Christians are going to be judged more strictly than those who do not know God.Consequently, there are passages of Scripture which seem to indicate this exact thing -- that those who know better will be judged more strictly: That's total bs Faith.A believer in Christ knows who their redeemer is. We know where we are going after our death. We know that God loves us. We are able to share this love to others and pull them from the darkness.An atheist knows there is material. They don't know, however, where they are going after they're death -- many seem to think that we cease to exist. They know what love is just like us, but they don't know where the love comes from. They are able to share love to others (and maybe even pull them from the darkness) but they can never be truly sure if their actions are anything more than a purely naturalistic process.This is surely a recipe for falling away from God don't you think? Well...I'll let jar defend himself. He seems to be doing a good job of this on his own in my opinion. That doesn't mean that I think jar is a genius just because he agrees with me -- although I do deeply respect the effort that he's gone to explain his position and can identify with many points he's made. I don't consider myself particularly smart anayway (and I'm certainly not a genius by any stretch), and I'm sure there's many areas where we disagree in some theological circles. Or, maybe you're starting to realize that I've been pointing to an extremely valid alternative to your theological views. I've never said that either Faith. I've always maintained that God judges in proportion that which is revealed to each individual. I kind of agree with jar when he says that Christians have a higher bar for entry into heaven than others do.Just as a baby could not be held accountable for their actions until they came to an age where they could understand instructions given to them, people who have never heard the fullness of the word of God as carefully described in the Christian Scriptures could not be fairly held accountable until such a time as the fullness of the revelation were carefully and lovingly explained to them by Christians. Because we've been called by God to do so. Because it's the truth.It's the same point as it's always been, to lead people to repentance in Christ -- because people are not saved without hearing the gospel. While I maintain that the word of Christ can be perceived in many areas of nature and religions outside the Christian Scriptures, we as Christians have the fullness of truth -- so there is no excuse for us to not preach Christ's word.In other words, just as at the most basic theistic level there is enough evidence in nature to prove God exists, at the most basic Christian level there is enough evidence in Scriptures to prove that Christ is God -- and the Spirit leads us to preach this truth to all who are willing to listen. What are you not understanding here?Just because one can be saved without knowledge of Christ directly from the Christian Scriptures, this doesn't mean that ALL PEOPLE who have not heard the Christian Scriptures are going to heaven.I'm not talking about universal salvation Faith. I do believe that many people who do not believe in Christ (by your definition) will still sadly be going to hell. My point is that Christ is capable of saving those that do not know he is the savior even though they acknowledge him by their actions. By leading them to Christ. How else do you think it does it? Yes and no.To quote Spider-Man's uncle, "With great power comes great responsibility." I've already aluded to the fact that the Scriptures say that we Christians will be judged more strictly than others. In this sense, we are to always be one guard and watching out for things.I think that the true knowledge of God is perhaps the most potentially dangerous and volatile power ever brought forth by him. When placed in the wrong hands, the knowledge of God can result in the most terrible calamities ever imagined.I know that others will laugh at me, but I do believe that there will be a literal anti-chirst walking the face of the earth some day. In this regard, I think he will probably claim to be a Christian of some sort -- and will highly abuse his God-given authority. Like the adversary, Balaam, and Judas Iscariot, he will probably be one who is very close to God but will rebel against him and do the utmost damage that one can think of in the name of God.All these above points are exanples of disadvantages.I'll adress some of the advantages below. First of all, there are plenty of special advantages to being a Christian.Here's a few that are mentioned in the Scriptures: More importantly, we are permanently indwelled by the Holy Spirit as Christians -- so long as we are alive. This is much different from others who are simply buffetted around between the motions of the Holy Spirit and the spirit of the adversary, the flesh and the world. While God can certainly work through someone who does not know him, it is no guarantee that salvation is inherrited by this. God could measure their lives at the end of human history and still save them based on their willingness to be moved by the Spirit, but non-believers are not necessarilly atracted to the motions of the Spirit.I suppose I look at it this way. When certain materials are shocked, they become magnetized and will align themselves to local manetic fields quite easilly. Similarly, when a Christian is baptized they easilly align themselves to the motion of the Holy Spirit.Now, in the case of a non-beleiver, let's say they were not "born again" in Christ. They've never been "magnetizied" by the Holy Spirit so that they can easilly align themselves to God's will. As such, this doesn't mean that they can't align themselves to the pull of the Holy Spirit. If God uses a powerful enough "magnet", they will still be pulled along by God -- they could even be fortunate enough to "aware" to the magnetic field even though they are not attacted to it. But, having said this, they will tend to resist the more natural attraction that God normally employs. In you opinion I will add. Because he is real and he wants to talk to us. He is deeply interested in what we think -- and how we feel.I also think that God cannot see evil when in heaven, so he became both true God and true Man in order to come down and experience everything we do so that he could save us. In other words, Christ came down so that he could sympathize with us and make an appeal for us before the father in heaven. His human nature was able to perceive the "sin" that God "in heaven" was incapable of looking upon -- even though his Godly soul was unable to be overcome by death. Christ was, in effect, tempted in every way, just as we are -? and yet was without sin. In dying, he took on our sins on his "human" body and then "sacrificed" himself by experiencing a torturous death so that his "Godly" soul could then overcome death. Because many people do not grasp it Faith. Whether because their senses are dimmed, or because they are simply blind to God's presense, it's too subliminal for some to grasp anymore. So God came in person to make this clear. Do you understand what I'm saying now? In other words, Christ came down so that he could sympathize with us and make an appeal for us before the father in heaven. His human nature was able to perceive the "sin" that God "in heaven" was incapable of looking upon -- even though his Godly soul was unable to be overcome by death. Christ was, in effect, tempted in every way, just as we are -? and yet was without sin. In dying, he took on our sins on his "human" body and then "sacrificed" himself by experiencing a torturous death so that his "Godly" soul could then overcome death.The Scriptures further emphasize this as follows: No. You're focussing on the passages that imply that anyone who doesn't believe in Christ are sufficiently damned. You're the one claiming that God only listens to you and Christians that think like you. Who has the issues with their ego Faith? No. I say that you might be right. But that I think you are wrong.You say that no one but you (and people who agree with you) are right -- period.Don't try to claim that there is no difference between my views and yours Faith. There's a big difference between them.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes: Since I notice that you're not really answering my questions, I'll just note that you probably weren't ready to study the Scriptures.

purpledawn writes:Then you would note incorrectly.

purpledawn writes:I'm always ready to study the scriptures.

purpledawn writes:You still haven't provided the ones that say God reveals himself omni-presently -- and he's talking to everyone who ever existed, exists, or ever will exist -- right now at this moment as we speak.

purpledawn writes:If you have explained this in detail then refer us back to the posts that support this opinion. I don't recall them.

purpledawn writes:You didn't explain what grace has to do with doubt.

purpledawn writes:It could also mean that God's grace is sufficient to carry your through whatever doubts you might have.

purpledawn writes:Plus, what scripture supports that opinion?

purpledawn writes:I have answered your questions...

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes: I've never said that God doesn't hide himself. I've even suggested some reasons, in my opinion, why God might really hide.One of these reasons, if I recall correctly, was the possibility of God destroying men by his presence -- and that he might hide in order to protect us from his own awesome presence.Another of those reasons, in my opinion, is that God hides his face when people sin -- or that God simply cannot look upon the face of sin.Yet, in another area, I think that God might hide his intentions so that perverse evil people do not distort the knowedge he has to offer about himself or his will -- again, in my opinion. Well..how about we look for passages which actually discuss why God might himself (or his intentions for that matter).For example, there's this: Question 4) Why would God want to hide this information from Abraham?Another passage of Scripture says the following: Here's another one: Question 5) Why is God hiding here -- and who is he protecting by doing so?Job 13:24 asks, "Why do you hide your face and consider me your enemy?"Psalm 10:1 asks, "Why, O LORD, do you stand far off? Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?"Another passage says: Question 6) Why is God hiding others?Psalm 44:24 asks. "Why do you hide your face and forget our misery and oppression?"Psalm 104:29 goes so far as to state, "When you hide your face, they are terrified; when you take away their breath, they die and return to the dust."I could also point to Psalm 88:14, Psalm 89:46, Psalm 102:2, Psalm 102:2, Psalm 143:7, or even Micah 3:4 which states, "Then they will cry out to the LORD, but he will not answer them. At that time he will hide his face from them because of the evil they have done."Question 7) Again, why is God hiding here?Look, I've just looked through the passages which talk about God hiding.First of all, I think they're using the idea of God hiding as a metaphor for humanity being in big trouble.Second of all, not once does it mention the idea of God hiding so as to generate a desire in others to seek him out.

purpledawn writes:...you just don't like my answers...

purpledawn writes:...and I don't like dogma.

purpledawn writes:If I have missed an important question that deals with this thread, then enlighten me.

purpledawn writes:Not sure why you have such a problem with my candle, but what you have shown me by your own answers is that God is determined not to allow scientific substantiation for his existence.

purpledawn writes:The candle would have been a very simple form of substantiation.

purpledawn writes:You have also made it clear that it requires faith (belief without proof) before God will reveal himself.

purpledawn writes:In this whole discussion about the candle you have not shown me a god who is determined to make his prescence known to all people.

purpledawn writes:So if God's existence was scientifically substantiated, there would be no need for faith (belief without proof). There still would be faith (complete trust).

purpledawn writes:Now that I have my Christian Bluegrass CD in, I will see if I can explain. Where to start?

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes: I guess I'll just conclude that the adversary did play some part in your biblical confusion.

purpledawn writes:Again you conclude wrong.

purpledawn writes:I'm not confused by the Bible. It says what it says. Religion is confused.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:Do you honestly believe your beautiful purple candle will light spontaniously by God's will?

purpledawn writes:Yes, if the Christian God exists, has the powers that are attributed to him and wants people to know that he exists.

Legend writes:is that the crux of your argument, more or less ?

Legend writes:Mr Ex, you've replied by quoting from here and there like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle that won't fit.

Legend writes:Can you try to keep it tidy please, it's hard to follow.

purpledawn writes:So faith (belief without proof) is necessary before proof or evidence is provided.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes: Lack of faith indicates lack of trusting the God who is already revealed on the most basic level through nature, a God who's nature and message is self-evident in the very things he has created.

Ben! writes:Evidence depends on interpretation.

Ben! writes:The same data can be consistent with multiple theories, multiple perspectives. For God to be "self-evident from the very things he has created", it has to be clear that he, and only he could have created them.

Ben! writes:Why are there other explanations of the origins of life out there that aren't "self-evidently" false?

Ben! writes:How can this be resolved with the "self-evident" nature of God that you describe?

Ben! writes:I care because what you see as self-evident doesn't feel self-evident to me. If it was self-evident, I would be a believer. I grew up trying to believe. I also grew up romping through the woods.

purpledawn writes: Stick with this thought and don't deviate.
I am talking about the Christian God from here on.We are to trust God because of what he has already revealed through nature which he created and what he has created reveals his nature.Please describe the nature of the Christian God and what has the natural world revealed that supports that description?

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:My point is that, contrary to what you have claimed, the psalm does seem to portray God speaking in a very literal sense throughout various mediums outside the Scriptures.

Legend writes:There is nothing literal about the Psalm itself.

Legend writes:Can't you read ? It's the *heavens* that declare, the *skies* that proclaim.

Legend writes:When was the last time you heard the heavens and the skies literally speaking?!

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:I've also pointed out that Paul seems to be concluding that this speech is so obvious that people who hear it are held accountable to it.

Legend writes:so Paul quotes Psalm 19:4 which testifies to the fact that the word has gone forth, so Israel must have heard it.

Legend writes:Just like I said in my previous post, when I tried to summarize your position.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:In addition to this, I've pointed out that the scope of this speech has gone out to the ends of the earth, is not limited strictly to the Israelites, and has been perceivable since the very beginning.

Legend writes:I generally agree here (though you could use 'speech' instead of speech, as it's not the literal meaning of the word), apart from the last bit: what makes you think that this 'speech' is perceived since the very beginning and wasn't heard only once ?

NIV writes:The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities -” his eternal power and divine nature -” have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Legend writes:Also what is this 'speech' about ? What is it that the Israelites (and everyone else) were supposed to have heard ?

NIV writes:For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)

Mr Ex writes:Actually, they fit together very well once you get rid of your assumptive baggage that you carry over from your former denominational faith

Legend writes:Here we go again! You don't even know what my former denominational faith was but you still assume I'm carrying assumptive baggage. Nice way to support your argument! (not)

Mr Ex writes:....and you're most certainly not very interested in understanding God (since you've admitted your questions are largely rhetorical and all).

Legend writes:You're not back to your old tactics of mis-representing (i.e. lying about) my position are you ?

Legend writes:when did I admit that my questions are largely rhetorical?

Legend writes: I'm not expecting an answer either, my question is largely rhetorical.

bkelly writes:Hello Legend,
Faith has implied clearly that god speaks to him. (Speaks in the sense of providing information in some manner) I have directly asked him how he knows god is speaking to him and how god speaks to him. I have also asked him to quote anything god has told him personally.
He has not answered the question. I suspect he will not give you an answer either.

Legend writes: while you're at it maybe you could also show me how am I supposed to know that God is talking to me?

Legend writes: even if I had how would you conclude from that I'm not very interested in understanding God ?!

Legend writes:I said that one question to you was largely rhetorical, the one in Message 62

And that was in response to Message 63 where bkelly said: and guess what? he was right - you never answered.

Legend writes:So I hope you'll correct this litle 'misinterpretation' of yours in your next message, right ?

Legend writes:I'd expect something along the lines of : thank you!!

Ben! writes:Mr. Ex,Thanks for the reply. I'll do my best to answer the questions, but ... generally I don't ask questions if I have an answer to them, so I'm afraid the answers aren't going to be very informative. But first, to ask about your comments (and sorry to add more work to your plate).

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:I've repeatedly pointed to things in nature and other religions which do bear a striking resemblance to Chrisitanity. I've also noted how these things seems to have led to a spiritual dialectic throughout all of human history eventually leading to its culmination in the Christian faith that we see today.
Here, for one example, let's take a look at Stoicism and note how many similarities it bears toward Christianity: Here's more for you to ponder while you're at it: How does one explain these Greeks developing a system of living (from their perceptions of nature) which so closely parallels Christianity -- but was developed 300 years before Christianity even came about?

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes: Africa
The Akan, Ashanti, Ga, Fante, and related people of Ghana and the Ivory Coast believe the universe was created by a supreme deity variously known as Oboadee (Creator), Nyame (God), or Ananse Kokuroko (The Great Spider). Nyambe, in particular, was considred the supreme being and creator god. Wide-spread over Western Equatorial Africa, his variant names included: Nzambi, Ndyambi, Dzambu, Tsambi, Yame, Sami, Zam, Monzam, Onayame. Also known as Nyambi, he was considered the creator of all things whose wife was Nailele. They lived on earth for a time but left to avoid the evil actions of Kamunu.Australia
The Australian mystery-rites reveal a moral creative being whose home is in or above the heavens, and his name is Maker (Baiame), Master (Biamban) and Father (Papang). The Benedictine monks of Australia say that the natives believe in an omnipotent Being, the creator of heaven and earth, whom they call Motogon. The Australian will say, "No, not seen him [i.e. Baiame], but I have felt him".China
Long ago before the introduction of Buddhism from India and the advent of Taoism, the Chinese believed in Shang Ti, a God so great that no images were to be made to represent it and the one true God who made the heavens, the earth, and all that is in both. This supreme god ruled over lesser gods of the sun, the moon, the wind, the rain, and other natural forces and places. Shang-Ti also regulated human affairs as well as ruling over the material universe.Egypt
In the most ancient monuments of Egypt the simplest and most precise conception of one God is expressed. For example, the Egyptian Book of the Dead demonstrates that the Egyptian people originally believed in one great God and not many. He is one and alone; no other beings are with Him; He is the only being living in truth; He is the self-existing one who made all things, and He alone has not been made.India
In the Rig-Veda, the most ancient of the Hindu sacred books, traces of a primitive monotheism are clearly shown. The Deity is called "the only existing being" who breathed, calmly self-contained, in the beginning before there was sky or atmosphere day or night, light or darkness. This being is not the barren philosophical entity found in the later Upanishads, for he is called "our Father", "our Creator", omniscient, who listens to prayers.Iranian
The Gathas, the most ancient hymns of the Avesta, form the kernel about which the sacred literature of the Iranians clustered in an aftergrowth. Although a duality of good and evil is expressed, they still nonethelss inculcate belief in Ahura Mazda, the self-existent omnipotent being. He is the all-powerful Lord who made heaven and earth, and all that is therein, and who governs everything with wisdom.

Tal Brooke's book "The Conspiracy to Silence the Son of God." writes:Wilhelm Schmidt, a Jesuit professor at the University of Vienna, spent over 40 years (1912-1955) documenting and compiling evidence for what he called "primitive monotheism." In 1931 he published his findings as The Origin and Growth of Religion, a book that revolutionized the study of religious anthropology.Schmidt thought that such beliefs were the residue of a primal revelation of God to man, the surviving forms of a once common knowledge of the one God, which through human fallenness and error has been overlaid by magic, animism, ancestor worship, spiritism, polytheism, and other forms of spiritual delusion. Schmidt continued to validate his thesis with relentless research over the years. By 1955 he had published over 4000 pages of evidence in 12 large volumes.Chesterton summed up the import of Schmidt's ground-breaking studies: _________________God's GoodbyePrimitive theologies of the one God always include some explanation of why He is no longer present. His departure is routinely regarded as a cosmic disastrous rupture in the natural fabric of things brought on by some fault or failure on the part of human beings. In some myths, the fault seems almost trivial, involving a technical error in the performance of some (now) obscure ritual, thus causing the universe to unravel and leave man spiritually marooned. In other forms of primitive monotheism, the failure is more morally serious, involving man's betrayal of his duty to his creator, thus causing God to depart in sorrow and judgment.The details differ, but all the myths tell a common story, and the story is clearly a part of our common heritage. Ironically, the evidence of anthropology indicates that ancient man was more in agreement concerning the nature of our spiritual problem than we have agreed about anything since that time. The reason is doubtless that their consensus was one of memory and not of opinion.Schmidt's work uncovered one momentous fact for all to see -- namely, that humanity's most ancient and universal assessment of its own condition is simply this: "God is not with us." For whatever reason, God's personal presence has been withdrawn from us. God's absence is our problemAlexander Brooks
The Real Jesus Already Stood Up

Similarities writes:He lives in, or above, the sky. (Anthropologists refer to him as the "Sky-God", although the name the peoples have for him is more commonly one meaning "Father" or "Creator").He is like a man, or a father.However his form cannot be physically represented, and so there are almost never idols of him.He is the creator of everything.He is eternal (i.e. He existed before anything else, and He will never cease to be).He is all-knowing.All that is good ultimately comes from him.He is the giver of moral law.He is good, and abhors all evil.He is all-powerful.He judges people after their death.People are alienated from him due to some misdemeanor in the past.As history proceeds, and the cultures are fragmented into more and more special interest groups, he is often supplanted in religions by gods which are "more accessible"; yet these religions still often carry a distant memory of this "Sky-God" whom they have lost most contact with.

Legend writes:I'm not expecting you to show me how God is talking to me because I know you can't. This doesn't mean that all my other questions are rhetorical too, neither than that I'm not very interested in understanding God, like you've said.

Legend writes:It's because it's irrelevant. It would just give you yet another way of evading questions by going on about what my former denominational church taught, rather than what my arguments really are.

Legend writes:well, you certainly don't, so Pepe it is then!

Pepe writes: Rhaaaack! ....Pepe has the answers!Rhaaak! ...pretty bird! pretty bird!

purpledawn writes:Unfortunately what you wrote to Ben and Legend does not address my post.

Romans 2:14-15 writes:(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)

Romans 1:18-20 writes:The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities”his eternal power and divine nature”have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

purpledawn writes:None of those comparisons deal with why you disagree with the Christian teaching that today God does not allow proof or evidence of his existence to generate faith (belief wihout proof).

purpledawn writes:You've already made it clear that you do not want to discuss whether God actually does provide proof or evidence that can be scientifically substantiated today.

purpledawn writes:So are you arguing against the teaching or whether the teaching actually exists?